About your Search

20121227
20121227
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
. lou: absolutely unfounded, the state of michigan,he any state diplomatic of labor in thi country, has to be the state of michigan moving in that direction, they you will, ofng south carolina and 23 i other states. this is starting to look like a serious shift historically in this country toward entire nation becoming a right to workk >> usc nine right-to-work statee gaining nine congressional seats from nine states. this is due mostly to the business climate leaving the states going to write to work state and the populations are following. you're seeing a shift overall in rit to work philosophy gaining traction. lou: creating them themselves had been envisioned, not sure to call them architects or what of obamacare.e these insurance exchanges are note happening now in 18 states plus d.c. are the only ones declaring they will set up their own exchanges under obamacare.th by my math that leaves 25 of thm government.h that is remarkable. >> leading the fight against the health care law in the supreme court able to carve out the ability for states to opt out and i amns proud w opting out
on the university of michigan law school plan had been upheld into the very thing grutter v. bollinger that have followed the plan closely enough so the court was obliged to uphold it. even one justice, judge garza, who said he hated racial preference isn't about to strike them down said that he had no choice but to uphold this one has been under supreme court precedent. by the way, seven of the 16 justices disagreed and thought you could strike it down under the career precedent. so the case finds its way to the supreme court and it's likely to perhaps become the most important case in history on racial preferences. not so much because there's anything that extraordinary about this case, but the composition of the court has changed his 2003 cases which could be fairly green light to racial preferences, very large racial preferences as long as they're camouflaged beneath the kind of complicated, holistic thing. holistic is like the word or sprinkle holy water over preferences. so here's how it worked at the university of texas. they have an academic index for people outside the top 10%. they hav
're just doing it the way the university of michigan law school did it, and so we're okay. there are a number of distinctions between the cases, though, that we think will help the, you know, the now-more skeptical about racial preferences court strike down tease preferences. they wouldn't have to overrule the grutter case to do so, because the grutter case justice o'connor articulated some principles that were supposed to limit the size and duration of racial preferences to avoid abuses, but she department really enforce them. -- she didn't really enforce them. but they remain on the books. you're supposed to pursue race-neutral alternatives before you resort to race. well, texas did. they have this 10% plan. they get a lot of racial diversity and other diversity from the 10% plan. did they really need to use individual racial preferences on top of it? that's one argument in her favor. another argument is the court has said no racial balancing, meaning you cannot try to mirror in your state's university's composition the racial proportions of the statewide population. tha
scoring based upon race. if they do that, they might run afoul of the michigan problem. assigning numbers to it, which creates another type of problem. it is possible that ms. fisher might have been admitted to a summer program under which texas and that the number of people who are not admitted to regular programs. it's not clear to me whether she actually tried to get into that program. in any event, she was not actually admitted it. one of the arguments that she made is it is impossible to reconstruct what would've happened. and that maybe this is a lawsuit which could prevent the university of texas from going forward with this program in the future. the problem from ms. fisher's perspective is she has already completed the university. this is not a class action. she has not sought an injunction against future use of the program because she would have no standing. the only thing she is seeking at this time is monetary damages. the damages she has claimed as far as i am aware that she paid an application fee of $100 or something of that range. and she wants that feedback. we are not cl
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)